Thursday, August 6, 2009

Human Life is Sacred - Thursday: Abortion

Another issue we’ll be dealing with this Sunday is abortion. There will be a lot more said on Sunday night with reference to this issue. There are many aspects to the issue itself, but fundamental to the pro-life vs. pro-choice position is the question, at what point in the process of gestation does the unborn become a person?

I believe that the fetus has full personhood from the moment of conception. Professor Scott Rae forms the argument this way:

  1. An adult human being is the end result of a continuous growth of the organism from conception (this premise has hardly any debate).
  2. From conception to adulthood, this development has no break that is relevant to the essential nature of the fetus (this is the debatable premise, but any proposed breaks are not comments on the nature of the fetus).
  3. Therefore, one is a human person from the point of conception onward (and no one debates that this conclusion follows from the above two premises).

One key to this argument is: From the moment of conception, the fetus possesses all the capacities to develop into a full adult. Therefore it is wrong to speak of a fetus as a potential human being. Rather, the fetus IS a person with the full potential to develop all of its latent capacities.

If you’re interested in this topic I would highly recommend Scott Rae’s book Moral Choices, the Stand to Reason website: www.str.org, and coming along on Sunday night to hear from Pastor John.

Posted by at
Labels: , , ,

1 comment:

  1. Jake CharlesAugust 10, 2009 at 5:32 PM

    One note on premise 2: The President's (Bush's) Council on Bioethics noted that after approximately 14 days the primitive streak appears which is a sort of meaningful discontinuity. Does that create any difference? Here is their reasoning:
    "A principal reason for the importance placed on the primitive streak has to do with the biology of twinning. Prior to the appearance of the primitive streak, an embryo may (rarely, and for unknown reasons) divide completely to form identical twins. Some conclude that individuality must not yet be established, since the embryo might yet become two embryos. Since individuality is essential to human personhood and capacity for moral status, since individuality presumes a definitive single individual, and since the singularity of the embryo is not irrevocably settled prior to the appearance of the primitive streak, they argue that the entity prior to the primitive streak stage lacks definitive individuality and hence also moral status."

    I'm not saying I'm persuaded but what do you make of that argument?

    ReplyDelete

Subscribe to: Post Comments (Atom)